The 13in MacBook Pro I reviewed last week is a machine for folk who fancy a carry-around computer but who want a bit more welly than the way more portable 13in MacBook Air can provide. The 15in version, on the other hand, is a desktop replacement for the power hungry.
Sure, it's mobile. It has a decent battery life. But it's not …

yes but no but yes

Like for like, Apple's good value for money

Expensive compared with what? A top-end Viao F series is (Sony's site is so damn slow it's timed out) - maybe it knows I'm just comparing prices. What a crap website.

Looking at other websites, there's no like-for-like comparison, e.g. with an equivalent processor, hard disc, memory, GPU, etc. From past experience their top-end machines cost as much if not more than Apple's machines and they're made from plastic and run "windows".

Checking Dell's website (that works although is very noisy) a "Precision M4500" specced up with an inferior 2.13GHz I7, etc. came to £2230. This is plastic and runs "windows".

Checking on the Apple website (it works and is fast - Sony take note), even when speccing up the machine to the max (8Gb, 2.3 quad-core I7, high-res screen) it's less than £2300. Perfectly reasonable price for a professional -- my plumber spends more than that on tools in his van.

BTW, speccing the Macbook with the slower 2.2GHz processor reduced the cost to under £2100, e.g. better performance for much less than the Dell.

From my own experience, Apple laptops are very much designed as workhorse machines.

The Viaos I've had in the past have really shown their age after a short amount of time as the plastic wears away and it cracks and creaks. IMO Dells are fugly, fully living up to their corporate drone persona, yuck.

Re: Like for like, Apple's good value for money

I buy Apple laptops for the spec and build quality. As you point out, comparing like for like they are pretty good value. I actually run Linux on them, so to me Apple are just another laptop vendor, and I could certainly go elsewhere to make my purchase if the quality and spec wasn't so good.

Bad example, bad comparison

That's not a very good example to compare against. A 17.3" screen with 1600x900 resolution? That's bargain bin trash...

Can you give us real world battery life on that thing? Less than the Mac? Oh... no dual graphic cards that autoswitch to conserve energy AND a 17.3 inch screen to light up.. ok.

Also, fitting the components within a bigger chassis is easier. Dropping the pitch of the screen significantly reduces a part of the cost, and gives an indicator towards the cost saving measures taken in other parts of the device.

I seem to recall a story about people complaining about the 27" iMac being expensive, but a closer examination showed that if you wanted the same quality screen (IPS) in that size you could also buy a hard drive and a keyboard before hitting the price of the complete iMac.... The quality of each component counts.

Don't get me wrong, I really like ASUS. I used to sell and service their machines and if I were to buy a computer for Linux or, against all odd, Windows, then ASUS would be among the first I would examine. Relatively cheap, and extremely good for the price.

hmmm

I just realized; my "late 2006" model MacBook Pro has the same vertical resolution, on a 15" screen... That is, IMO, on the lower side these days. On a 17" screen that would be pure awful, blocky and nasty.

Can you confirm one thing for me?

The resolution of the new 15-inch 2011 MacBook is 1440x900. Is this the same resolution as your five-year-old 2006 Macbook Pro?

Oh wait, I found the answer to my question at

http://support.apple.com/kb/sp24

Look, I am not anti-Apple. I almost went OS X until I tried 64-bit Windows 7. I am not a Windows fanboy. I admit Windows 7 is not as good as OS X, but it's good enough, unlike Vista. Windows 7 crashed on me only once since I bought my latest notebook six months ago. (I know, I know, once is once too often.)

Apple Lappies.

Thru' the years I have had 3 of them, 2 intels, 1 PPC. They have all been quite reliable, although the PPC's keyboard is getting somewhat flaky.

I agree with you though, Asus is just as reliable, within that same time period I have had 4 of them, 2 netbooks. Arguably, sometimes, they are almost (but admittedly not quite) as sexy.

The only issues I would have had with Apple lappies recently is the same things I have had with them: lack of 2 button trackpad (work-round-able I guess, but still, the workaround is inelegant), and a somewhat non-standard keyboard with less keys than what I am used to, and recently (not exclusive to apple I must say), the difficulties of getting matte screens. The non-replaceable battery is also a double edged sword to some degree.

Apple, take note. I was thinking of buying a new Core i7 macbook pro to replace my last macbook, but no more.

I then went on to state that the Macbook has slightly better graphics. Not £800 better graphics, mind.

Having read this article, though, a lot of the concessions I gave the Macbook go out of the window. If it *is* a desktop replacement, the much better battery life, and build quality in the Macbook become pretty much irrelevant.

My original point does still stand, though - Apple residuals are significantly better than pretty much any other hardware vendor. If you can afford to pay 1.66 times the price of the Dell for the similarly specced Macbook, you may get that back a few years down the road when it comes to selling the machine.

@ sign

There's no such thing as a "proper" UK keyboard

You're thinking of the de facto IBM PC layout. Apple's UK keyboards remain as they have been since time immemorial, with £ on the '3', @ on the '2', quote and double quote combined on a key, etc.

Mac keyboards have an extra modifier or two, a few other extra keys including eject, don't bother with home/end, page down/page up (all of which are achieved with modifier + arrows), and tend to be more willing to hide the function keys since they're not really used for anything in OS X. So, sure, they could swap a couple of keys around and be closer to the IBM PC layout but they're not in a position to adopt it wholesale.

Desktop replacement?

I don't consider a 15 in machine this svelt to be a desktop replacement - sure, it can fulfil that role, but these are some of the most portable 15 in laptops made, certainly being amonst the slimmest and lightest.

I have a 3yo 15 in MacBook Pro and it's very portable indeed, you just need a lap protector if you're using it on the sofa/in bed for any great length of time, which to be honest, you should have for any laptop anyway as most of them vent underneath (unlike the MBP which vents out the back).

Display Options

Article failed to mention there are three different displays available on the 15". 1) The standard glossy, 2) high-res glossy (+$100), and 3) high-res anti-glare (+$150). Don't know if high-res really improves anything but having seen glossy displays I had to have anti-glare and don't regret it. Trivia fact: the high-res antiglare MacBook has an aluminum border around the display. The standard display has a glossy black frame.

As for the cost of a Mac, I upgrade every 5 years. My new i7 MacBook Pro replaces the original intel MacBook Pro from 2006. My old still did everything asked of it but its 2GB memory limitation was starting to be a limitation if Parallels was running XP Pro and anything else was going on.

The machined aluminum case appears to be much sturdier than the stamped aluminum of my old. Have had to pop dents out of the corners a time or two. The old has two rubber feet on the display lid while the new has a rubber gasket running around the perimeter. There doesn't seem to be anything about the new that isn't somehow improved over the old, yet my old is still quite serviceable.

Hot lap

Agree with the reviewer, all of my laptops have been high end and generate a lot of heat. At least with the Apple products there are plenty of risers specifically build for the Mac with nice soft leg friendly cushioning (try getting a nice riser to fit a large 17" Sony or Dell Precision !).

Yawn...

... people only get off their arses to complain when something goes wrong. You never hear from people whose kit is working just fine. Anecdotal "My laptop has a dud component!" stories are not evidence of endemic issues, and never have been.

E.g. I have an iPhone 4. Guess what? NO antenna problems AT ALL. In fact, it gets better reception than anyone else's around here in the back of beyond. SImilarly, my Macbook Pro (mid-2010 model) is also working just fine, with no issues whatsoever.

As an aside, I think an SSD is probably a much useful upgrade than a slightly better processor or GPU. I made the mistake of speccing 8GB RAM on my Macbook Pro, (as getting Apple to fit it was no more expensive than buying it elsewhere, for once), but not updating the stock 5400 RPM HDD. I should have gone for the SSD option, even though it was eye-wateringly expensive. Having played with one of the new Macbook Airs, it's astonishing just how great a difference in perceived performance that SSD makes.

A superb set-up

Just bought mine with an SSD and the non-glossy Hi-res Screen and it is fantastic. I got the non-glossy because I can't stand the reflectiveness of the normal set-up and the Hi-Res (1680 x 1050) is a nice bonus, making for a great desktop space.

With the SSD, this thing IS silent and starts up in about 10 seconds. Apps launch almost instantly. I am very happy with it and hope it will be powerful and reliable enough to last 5 years or so, which will make it pretty good value.